배당이의
1. Of the distribution schedule prepared by the said court on October 30, 2015 with respect to the distribution procedures D of the Suwon District Court’s Pyeongtaek Housing Site D.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants filed an order of seizure and collection with respect to the wage claim against Suwon District Court Pyeongtaek Branch E Company, which was issued by the said court, to seize and collect the benefit claim from the said court. The Plaintiff received the order of seizure and collection from the said court (hereinafter “each collection order of this case”). The order of each collection of this case was served on only 3 debtor corporation, the third debtor corporation at around that time. < Amended by Act No. 2007, 206TT No. 537, 2013; Act No. 1877, 207TT 187, 2013T 4968, 8423, 2014; Act No. 12090, Mar. 23, 2014>
B. Accordingly, the Suwon District Court deposited KRW 4,551,883 of the Plaintiff’s wage to E as KRW 2015Hun-1325 of the Housing Site Costs, and the said court commenced the distribution procedure for the said deposit as D (hereinafter “instant distribution procedure”). The Plaintiff and the Defendants participated in the instant distribution procedure as the collection right holder based on each collection order of the instant case.
C. On October 30, 2015, the above court issued a collection order of KRW 7,098,159, and KRW 128,962, based on the collection order of KRW 2006,537, and KRW 11,030,461 based on the collection order of KRW 11,159,423 (= KRW 128,962, KRW 11,030,461), Defendant C, based on the collection order of KRW 1877, KRW 10,746, KRW 2013, KRW 498, KRW 206, KRW 2085, KRW 11,030, KRW 468, KRW 2085, KRW 2081, KRW 28485, KRW 20845, KRW 2881, KRW 25865, KRW 2884, KRW 28581, KRW 2845, KRW 28654815, etc.
The amount of the plaintiff's demand for distribution was 3,126,814,931 won in total.
On the date of distribution of this case, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the Defendants as to the whole amount of dividends, and in the lawsuit of demurrer against distribution of this case, the Plaintiff raised an objection against Defendant B as to the amount of dividends.